What do you think?
Rate this book
Signature Killers
____________________
‘This book will make you think… it will frighten you, and it will shock you… Frankly I could not read it at night.’ – Ann Rule, author of The Stranger Beside The Inside Story of Serial Killer Ted Bundy
HOW DO YOU CATCH A SERIAL KILLER?
Interpreting the calling cards of the serial murderer, Robert Keppel reveals the answers hidden among the grisly evidence, the common threads that link each devastating act of brutal violence. Explore in unflinching detail the monstrous patterns, sadistic compulsions and depraved motives of the killer, and why they kill again and again.
Signature Killers is the ultimate insight into the mind of the serial killer.
From The Lonely Hearts Killer who haunted the most desperate of women in 1950s America, to the infamous symbols of evil as Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and John Gacy, these are the cases – horrifying, graphic and unforgettable – that shed light on the darkest corners of the pathological mind.
‘This book will make you think… it will frighten you, and it will shock you… Frankly I could not read it at night.’ – Ann Rule, author of The Stranger Beside The Inside Story of Serial Killer Ted Bundy
HOW DO YOU CATCH A SERIAL KILLER?
Interpreting the calling cards of the serial murderer, Robert Keppel reveals the answers hidden among the grisly evidence, the common threads that link each devastating act of brutal violence. Explore in unflinching detail the monstrous patterns, sadistic compulsions and depraved motives of the killer, and why they kill again and again.
Signature Killers is the ultimate insight into the mind of the serial killer.
From The Lonely Hearts Killer who haunted the most desperate of women in 1950s America, to the infamous symbols of evil as Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and John Gacy, these are the cases – horrifying, graphic and unforgettable – that shed light on the darkest corners of the pathological mind.
376 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1997
69 people are currently reading
2862 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews
May 3, 2017
I certainly enjoyed reading this book and never felt bored, it was very interesting.
I also had absolutely no problem with the writing style and/or the terminology, like some others seemed to have had.
However, I noticed that there was some false information about Jeffrey Dahmer included (especially concerning the alleged animal abuse - a rather sensitive topic in this type of genre).
I do not know if this is down to lazy research or if it seemed like the correct information back when the book was published.
I'm not familiar enough with the other crimes that are described in great detail, so I'm not able to judge if this is a recurring problem or if it just appears within the Dahmer case.
I also felt like the author was a bit too set on the picture perfect "traditional family" during the last chapter.
Maybe it was intended differently, but to me it came off as if he was trying to say that parents should stay at home 24/7 and stop living their lives as soon as they decide to have children.
A viewpoint I definitely do not share.
I also had absolutely no problem with the writing style and/or the terminology, like some others seemed to have had.
However, I noticed that there was some false information about Jeffrey Dahmer included (especially concerning the alleged animal abuse - a rather sensitive topic in this type of genre).
I do not know if this is down to lazy research or if it seemed like the correct information back when the book was published.
I'm not familiar enough with the other crimes that are described in great detail, so I'm not able to judge if this is a recurring problem or if it just appears within the Dahmer case.
I also felt like the author was a bit too set on the picture perfect "traditional family" during the last chapter.
Maybe it was intended differently, but to me it came off as if he was trying to say that parents should stay at home 24/7 and stop living their lives as soon as they decide to have children.
A viewpoint I definitely do not share.
August 26, 2017
Dr. Keppel is a visionary, ground-breaking criminologist and an excellent analyst. I admire him greatly. But he needs someone to edit the living shit out of his prose.
I will give only one example, because it's like shooting fish in a barrel:
Let me clean this paragraph up:
I've interpolated information (mostly antecedents) from earlier paragraphs, but otherwise all I've done is rearrange the information Keppel provides in order to give it a logical throughline. What it still lacks is the signposting that tells you how it relates to the thesis of this section of Keppel's argument (which is that a serial murderer's signature is not the same as his modus operandi), and I'm honestly not quite sure HOW it relates. Is he saying that Cottingham's experiments with evidence removal were part of his evolving MO, or that Cottingham's obsession with evidence removal was part of his signature?
This is why you need editors.
Birnes did a better job of taming Keppel's stream-of-consciousness prose in The Riverman: Ted Bundy and I Hunt for the Green River Killer (at least, I assume--perhaps incorrectly--that that's Birnes' contribution); Signature Killers reads like it was written and published too fast. Other than that, I found this book interesting and compelling. Keppel has the range of knowledge to support his argument convincingly.
He discusses Morris Frampton, Harvey Glatman, William Heirens, Richard Cottingham, Timothy Spencer, Cleophus Prince, Nathanial Code, Steven Pennell, George Russell, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Ted Bundy (John Wayne Gacy shows up frequently in comparisons, and he couldn't include Gary Ridgway, because this book was published in 1997, before Ridgway was caught), talking in each case about how to discern the signature and how the signature helped detectives find and stop each man, and noting parallels between them, ways that they are all demonstrating the same wrong turn in their psyches.
It's important to note SOMEWHERE, and here is as good as anywhere, that women are very rarely sexual signature killers--Aileen Wuornos being the token exception. But that isn't the same as saying women aren't serial killers. They just tend to kill people they have relationships with (husbands, children, patients, etc.), rather than strangers, and they don't seem as often to fetishize the act of murder itself. Mary Ann Cotton is my favorite example, but there's also Amy Archer-Gilligan, and Mary Ann Geering. They aren't as SHOWY as the sexual signature killers, but they are there. And they were there long before Jack the Ripper. People (mostly men) who commit serial murder for sexual reasons may be a product of modernity, but serial murderers are not. Keppel has an elaborate argument about how sexual signature killers are created by the collapse of the extended kinship group as unit of family, leading to fewer people to do the parenting (plus, he doesn't quite say, women entering the work force), leading to babies being neglected at a critical stage of the development of their psyche, which results (sometimes--he does say) in psychopaths who kill for anger or for pleasure. And that may be why there are so many angry psychopathic men roaming the 20th century killing women for sport. But it's not why human beings sometimes commit serial murder.
If you are interested in signature killers--psychopaths who commit serial stranger murder for reasons that inevitably betray their presence in the way the crimes are committed--this is an excellent book and I highly recommend it.
I will give only one example, because it's like shooting fish in a barrel:
The killer's MO was extensively refined and stylized as he continued killing. In practically every circumstance, the killer did something to clean up the crime scene after him. He took jewelry, purses, and clothing from his victims. In New York, the motel fires could even have been interpreted as an effort to cover up physical evidence of the crimes. The killer also may have tried to prevent identification in the New York murders by removing the heads and hands of his victims at one scene, but he really didn't need to worry. After his two New York City mutilations, Cottingham didn't have to fear that the identification would lead police to him. None of his other crimes had put authorities on his trail. Like serial killers near the end of their arc of violence, part of Cottingham believed he was completely invisible and could commit rapes and murders at will. Another part of him remained obsessively paranoid about leaving evidence at the crime scene. Therefore, in the arson murders, where the act of setting the fires was the last act of the killer at the crime scene, the setting of the fire may not have been some sexually perverted paraphilia with fire that some offenders possess. It might simply have been Cottingham's attempt to lead Manhattan detectives down a blind alley.
(73)
Let me clean this paragraph up:
Cottingham's MO became increasingly refined and stylized with each murder. Like other serial killers near the end of their arc of violence [the "end" of the arc being their arrest, not their choice to stop killing, because they will never make that choice -sm], part of Cottingham believed he was completely invisible and could commit rapes and murders at will. Another part of him remained obsessively paranoid about leaving evidence at the crime scene, even though none of his crimes thus far had put the authorities on his trail. In practically every circumstance, Cottingham did something to clean up the crime scene after him. He took jewelry, purses, and clothing from his victims. In the West 42nd Street murders, he went farther, both removing the heads and hands of his victims and setting the fire as his last act at the crime scene. Given that his other crimes did not include arson, but did include this obsession with removing evidence, it seems most probable that his actions in the West 42nd Street Travel Lodge, rather than demonstrating a paraphilia for fire, were a further, ritualistic (and partially successful) attempt to destroy evidence of the murders of Deedah Godzari and Jane Doe.
I've interpolated information (mostly antecedents) from earlier paragraphs, but otherwise all I've done is rearrange the information Keppel provides in order to give it a logical throughline. What it still lacks is the signposting that tells you how it relates to the thesis of this section of Keppel's argument (which is that a serial murderer's signature is not the same as his modus operandi), and I'm honestly not quite sure HOW it relates. Is he saying that Cottingham's experiments with evidence removal were part of his evolving MO, or that Cottingham's obsession with evidence removal was part of his signature?
This is why you need editors.
Birnes did a better job of taming Keppel's stream-of-consciousness prose in The Riverman: Ted Bundy and I Hunt for the Green River Killer (at least, I assume--perhaps incorrectly--that that's Birnes' contribution); Signature Killers reads like it was written and published too fast. Other than that, I found this book interesting and compelling. Keppel has the range of knowledge to support his argument convincingly.
He discusses Morris Frampton, Harvey Glatman, William Heirens, Richard Cottingham, Timothy Spencer, Cleophus Prince, Nathanial Code, Steven Pennell, George Russell, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Ted Bundy (John Wayne Gacy shows up frequently in comparisons, and he couldn't include Gary Ridgway, because this book was published in 1997, before Ridgway was caught), talking in each case about how to discern the signature and how the signature helped detectives find and stop each man, and noting parallels between them, ways that they are all demonstrating the same wrong turn in their psyches.
It's important to note SOMEWHERE, and here is as good as anywhere, that women are very rarely sexual signature killers--Aileen Wuornos being the token exception. But that isn't the same as saying women aren't serial killers. They just tend to kill people they have relationships with (husbands, children, patients, etc.), rather than strangers, and they don't seem as often to fetishize the act of murder itself. Mary Ann Cotton is my favorite example, but there's also Amy Archer-Gilligan, and Mary Ann Geering. They aren't as SHOWY as the sexual signature killers, but they are there. And they were there long before Jack the Ripper. People (mostly men) who commit serial murder for sexual reasons may be a product of modernity, but serial murderers are not. Keppel has an elaborate argument about how sexual signature killers are created by the collapse of the extended kinship group as unit of family, leading to fewer people to do the parenting (plus, he doesn't quite say, women entering the work force), leading to babies being neglected at a critical stage of the development of their psyche, which results (sometimes--he does say) in psychopaths who kill for anger or for pleasure. And that may be why there are so many angry psychopathic men roaming the 20th century killing women for sport. But it's not why human beings sometimes commit serial murder.
If you are interested in signature killers--psychopaths who commit serial stranger murder for reasons that inevitably betray their presence in the way the crimes are committed--this is an excellent book and I highly recommend it.
January 8, 2021
I've always been fascinated by serial killers and the psyche behind their violent sadistic crimes. What makes a killer kill? What is it that compels them to mutilate, degrade or even consume their victims post-mortem? What went so wrong during their childhood that they grew up to commit these heinous crimes that shook the entire nation?
Naturally, the psyche behind the world's most prolific killers is too complex and unique to be answered by a single book. Nevertheless, it was a very informative read. It covers from the most notorious such as Ted Bundy & Jeffery Dahmer to the lesser - known killers like George RusselI & Nathaniel Code. This was not an easy book to read partly due to the explicit details of the crime scenes and partly because it can be a bit repetitive sometimes. Overall, it was an enjoyable experience and I would reccommend it to someone who wants to deep dive into the minds, modus operandi and the signature aspects of the serial killers.
Naturally, the psyche behind the world's most prolific killers is too complex and unique to be answered by a single book. Nevertheless, it was a very informative read. It covers from the most notorious such as Ted Bundy & Jeffery Dahmer to the lesser - known killers like George RusselI & Nathaniel Code. This was not an easy book to read partly due to the explicit details of the crime scenes and partly because it can be a bit repetitive sometimes. Overall, it was an enjoyable experience and I would reccommend it to someone who wants to deep dive into the minds, modus operandi and the signature aspects of the serial killers.
May 9, 2020
On the whole, I think this book would be great for someone who just as a one off wants to read a gory, true crime, and just wants to pick sections concerning certain serial killers' crimes to read up on.
However, for someone like me who us pursuing a career in forensic psychology, and therefore is already familiar with the details of the case, and thus came seeking the advertised look into the psyche of serial killers, I was quite disappointed.
The book was heavily repetitive, both within and across chapters, and probably could have been about half the size. Whilst the commentary was interesting, and raised some interesting ideas, I felt that a lot of the views on why the serial killers became what they did was quite lacklustre, and nothing groundbreaking. There was also zero referencing...not a single one, which I found quite surprising given some of the claims made in the last chapter, which certainly would benefit from having evidence to support them, as Keppel concerns them as facts, and not just his opinions.
Keppel inarguably is fantastic in his field and at what he does, but I don't think writing is his forte. Like I say, the book was very repetitive, and often seemed to just clump random facts about serial killers together, with no background or interaction with the analysis of their psyche. On the whole, not necessarily a bad read in regards to having the gory details of serial killers, but offers nothing that you couldn't get elsewhere from a YouTube video or online article summarising the crimes.
However, for someone like me who us pursuing a career in forensic psychology, and therefore is already familiar with the details of the case, and thus came seeking the advertised look into the psyche of serial killers, I was quite disappointed.
The book was heavily repetitive, both within and across chapters, and probably could have been about half the size. Whilst the commentary was interesting, and raised some interesting ideas, I felt that a lot of the views on why the serial killers became what they did was quite lacklustre, and nothing groundbreaking. There was also zero referencing...not a single one, which I found quite surprising given some of the claims made in the last chapter, which certainly would benefit from having evidence to support them, as Keppel concerns them as facts, and not just his opinions.
Keppel inarguably is fantastic in his field and at what he does, but I don't think writing is his forte. Like I say, the book was very repetitive, and often seemed to just clump random facts about serial killers together, with no background or interaction with the analysis of their psyche. On the whole, not necessarily a bad read in regards to having the gory details of serial killers, but offers nothing that you couldn't get elsewhere from a YouTube video or online article summarising the crimes.
March 14, 2015
The only part of this book I liked was the foreword. The rest of it was repetitive (just one example: apparently one of the killers' blood types belongs to only 13% of the population. A fact the author told us a minimum of 3 times within one chapter) and frustratingly uninteresting.
What I very often dislike about non-fiction books is that authors always seem to struggle to remove themselves from the subject matter. Often their opinion just seems to creep in when I would really like an impartial retelling. Maybe I'm being too ambitious in this thought. I probably wouldn't mind hearing an author's opinion if it wasn't so obnoxious and big-headed.
What I very often dislike about non-fiction books is that authors always seem to struggle to remove themselves from the subject matter. Often their opinion just seems to creep in when I would really like an impartial retelling. Maybe I'm being too ambitious in this thought. I probably wouldn't mind hearing an author's opinion if it wasn't so obnoxious and big-headed.
November 27, 2016
A grim, grisly read detailing the atrocities visited on the victims of about 15 different serial killers, the escalating pattern of violence, and the evidence of signature in each crime scene. Geared to be educational, this one rarely becomes textbookey because it is so grounded in the horrific sights seen by homicide detectives. The text focused on lesser-known serial killers who were especially clear examples of this or that type of signature crime, but touched on some of the best-known cases as well, and I even managed to learn new facts about the well-worn cases of Bundy and Dahmer. I have to say the arguments tended to fall apart when the authors were discussing Bill Heirens, as if they were not sure of themselves in discussing this case. The way Keppel quoted Ted Bundy -- as if he were an expert on pattern crimes rather than someone who killed 36 women because he had issues -- made me almost as queasy as the crime scenes themselves.
March 29, 2021
Certainly an interesting book, however I’m not keen on the authors writing style which makes it very boring to read and I skimmed through most of the book due to this.
October 31, 2011
Even by true crime standards, this book is pretty nasty. Robert D. Keppel delves into a number of sado-sexual serial killings, and the result is a lot of “young woman hacked apart by weirdo loner man” casefile detail.
Keppel tries to give some meaningful analysis of “signatures” and how they differ from MO – and, indeed, maybe his analysis was groundbreaking when the book was published, but now it all seems very old hat. To make things worse, Signature Killers is really, really badly written. This isn’t Stephenie Meyer “for the love of sparkles” purple prose bad writing; this is just plain clunky, flunked-out-of-high-school-English bad writing.
However, this is one of those books that I find tricky to review, because despite all the ways it is nasty and pedestrian... it was exactly what I needed to read. I’m researching serial killers and Signature Killers was incredibly helpful. So... am I glad I read it? Yeah! Do I recommend you read it? Hell no.
Keppel tries to give some meaningful analysis of “signatures” and how they differ from MO – and, indeed, maybe his analysis was groundbreaking when the book was published, but now it all seems very old hat. To make things worse, Signature Killers is really, really badly written. This isn’t Stephenie Meyer “for the love of sparkles” purple prose bad writing; this is just plain clunky, flunked-out-of-high-school-English bad writing.
However, this is one of those books that I find tricky to review, because despite all the ways it is nasty and pedestrian... it was exactly what I needed to read. I’m researching serial killers and Signature Killers was incredibly helpful. So... am I glad I read it? Yeah! Do I recommend you read it? Hell no.
September 22, 2009
While Robert Keppel was a splendid detective and is a good writer, I just want to take a moment to vent. When I was a junior in college, I had an opportunity to take a course at the U-Dub called "Murder". To this day, it remains one of my all-time favorite classes. Ret. Det. Keppel was co-teaching the class. This man was such a terrible teacher. Seriously, he was able to make Ted Bundy boring! We got to listen to the actual interviews Det. Keppel had with Bundy and Keppel's descriptions of what was going on was excruciating. Okay, I'm glad I got that off my chest. Sorry Det., you should stick to the chasing bad guys and writing. Teaching is not your thing.
March 31, 2009
I read this book so many times growing up that the pages are falling out. (I know that sounds creepy, but keep in mind I was planning on being the next Clarice Starling. Haha.)
May 8, 2020
3.25 Stars
March 13, 2022
Tldr: Interesting but Keppel has a bad habit of repeating himself. This book could have been at least half as long. Although Ted Bundy is mentioned and quoted many times the author never actually does a deep dive into his murders.
___
I was rather confused on whether this was supposed to be a look at certain serial killers and their signatures or specific signatures outwith the killers. Although the chapter titles specifically pointed towards signatures such as torture and picquerism (stabbing), the content of the chapters were looking at the murders and subsequent arrests of a single killer each chapter, with each killer seemingly having every signature (if in differing amounts). With the repetition between chapters (and even between paragraphs, 13% of the male population having a specific semen sample being an example that stood out the most strongly) every killer felt similar and boring.
Keppel also seems to be obsessed with connecting signature murders with sexual excitement, even when the murders themselves did not contain sexual assault, specifically stating that killers masturbate to the memory/thought of the murder later. Now, I am not a psychologist, or a murderer even, but this smells like bullsh*t to me. Even in the cases of literal rape, the perpetrator is more likely to quote control as being the dominant factor rather than sex itself. I can understand killers feeling satisfaction and excitement about their exploits, but for everything to boils down to sex sounds like shitty writing.
Lastly, to constantly mention Ted Bundy throughout the book and not give his murders and arrest the same level of attention as someone like George Russel, who I had not heard of before this book and who is CONTINUALLY compared to Bundy, beggars belief. Bundy is brought up time and time again in passing almost like the signature, signature killer (if you will) and yet his signatures aren't even discussed? It either feels like lazy writing or Keppel ran out of space or time.
___
I was rather confused on whether this was supposed to be a look at certain serial killers and their signatures or specific signatures outwith the killers. Although the chapter titles specifically pointed towards signatures such as torture and picquerism (stabbing), the content of the chapters were looking at the murders and subsequent arrests of a single killer each chapter, with each killer seemingly having every signature (if in differing amounts). With the repetition between chapters (and even between paragraphs, 13% of the male population having a specific semen sample being an example that stood out the most strongly) every killer felt similar and boring.
Keppel also seems to be obsessed with connecting signature murders with sexual excitement, even when the murders themselves did not contain sexual assault, specifically stating that killers masturbate to the memory/thought of the murder later. Now, I am not a psychologist, or a murderer even, but this smells like bullsh*t to me. Even in the cases of literal rape, the perpetrator is more likely to quote control as being the dominant factor rather than sex itself. I can understand killers feeling satisfaction and excitement about their exploits, but for everything to boils down to sex sounds like shitty writing.
Lastly, to constantly mention Ted Bundy throughout the book and not give his murders and arrest the same level of attention as someone like George Russel, who I had not heard of before this book and who is CONTINUALLY compared to Bundy, beggars belief. Bundy is brought up time and time again in passing almost like the signature, signature killer (if you will) and yet his signatures aren't even discussed? It either feels like lazy writing or Keppel ran out of space or time.
September 24, 2022
Signature killers is not a book for everyone. It contains sadism, humiliation, violence, torture, overkill, necrophilia and cannibalism. If you’ve experienced trauma and have triggers, this book is not good for your (mental) health.
This is a journey of Keppel through the years as an American law enforcement officer and homicide detective. From the murder at the South Park Marina in 1977 to the Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy cases.
A signature killer is his psychological 'calling card' that he leaves at each crime scene across a spectrum of several murders. Most serial killers have been living with their fantasies for years before they finally bubble to the surface and are translated into deeds. This is not a quick read but some works that a reader can learn and understand about a criminally aberrant personality.
I agree with the author. We are in the midst of an age of administrative blamelessness where no one is picking up the slack. When people ask about the reason for the growing number of crimes, people have to look at the collapse of the traditional family.
My personal rating 4.9 ⭐️
#donereading #SignatureKillers by #RobertDKeppel #arrowbooks #igreads #bookstagram #goodreads #emabaca #malaysiamembaca
This is a journey of Keppel through the years as an American law enforcement officer and homicide detective. From the murder at the South Park Marina in 1977 to the Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy cases.
A signature killer is his psychological 'calling card' that he leaves at each crime scene across a spectrum of several murders. Most serial killers have been living with their fantasies for years before they finally bubble to the surface and are translated into deeds. This is not a quick read but some works that a reader can learn and understand about a criminally aberrant personality.
I agree with the author. We are in the midst of an age of administrative blamelessness where no one is picking up the slack. When people ask about the reason for the growing number of crimes, people have to look at the collapse of the traditional family.
My personal rating 4.9 ⭐️
#donereading #SignatureKillers by #RobertDKeppel #arrowbooks #igreads #bookstagram #goodreads #emabaca #malaysiamembaca
December 13, 2021
BOOK REVIEW
I love true crime. Everyone knows that. And who is a better person to tell me more about sadistic killers than Robert D. Keppel, who had worked as an investigator/consultant in over 2000 murders and more than 50 serial murders investigations?
In this book, the author explains that although modus operandi of serial killers evolve over time but there's a constant, unique trait that criminologists consider as his signature.
What I like about this book :
1. The author spent most of the chapters talking about serial killers I've never heard of e.g. Richard Cottingham, Harvey Glatman and Nathaniel Code. This is in contrast with other writers who capitalised on our fascination with a more famous murderers such as the Zodiac Killer and BTK.
What I hate about this book :
1. Too many spelling errors. In fact, once I was left confused when a new victim appeared out of nowhere. The spelling of the victim's name was way off.
2. The book is too long. The author emphasized the same thing over and over again. He really need a better editor.
3. I've read so many books on serial killers, less than 5% of this book teaches me something new.
🌟🌟🌟
Read from Nov 23 - Dec 13
I love true crime. Everyone knows that. And who is a better person to tell me more about sadistic killers than Robert D. Keppel, who had worked as an investigator/consultant in over 2000 murders and more than 50 serial murders investigations?
In this book, the author explains that although modus operandi of serial killers evolve over time but there's a constant, unique trait that criminologists consider as his signature.
What I like about this book :
1. The author spent most of the chapters talking about serial killers I've never heard of e.g. Richard Cottingham, Harvey Glatman and Nathaniel Code. This is in contrast with other writers who capitalised on our fascination with a more famous murderers such as the Zodiac Killer and BTK.
What I hate about this book :
1. Too many spelling errors. In fact, once I was left confused when a new victim appeared out of nowhere. The spelling of the victim's name was way off.
2. The book is too long. The author emphasized the same thing over and over again. He really need a better editor.
3. I've read so many books on serial killers, less than 5% of this book teaches me something new.
🌟🌟🌟
Read from Nov 23 - Dec 13
November 28, 2025
I did really enjoy this book. I'm giving it three stars for two reasons. First of all, there were far too many typos, misspellings, and grammatical errors for me to overlook. The printing was just poor quality. There was even an actual printing error in which the print at the top of the page got cut off. The second reason is that, near the end of the book, the author, Robert D. Keppel, PhD, got quite preachy about the harmful ramifications of divorce on the burgeoning young minds of our youth and the impact of pornography and TV violence on the same youth. He was quick to point out that TV violence and pornography do not make a serial killer, but he did say that seeing such violence against women does desensitize youth to violence when some youth are already predisposed to having a difficult time differentiating between fantasy and reality. I understand his concerns, but one, I don't quite agree that the situation is that dire regarding both the ramifications of divorce and TV violence, and two, I didn't like the fact that he was going on and on about it. I would have just preferred if he had continued describing the inner workings of the serial killer mind.
August 6, 2019
Keppel’s work on signature killers is second-to-none. When reading this book, you can tell he’s devoted his life to this, which is exactly why it’s a bit of a bad read. Keppel is not a writer, by any stretch of the imagination, but damn if he doesn’t know his shit.
Most of the information in the book is common knowledge if you’ve done research on serial murders for any length of time, but the psychology that he delves into is truly fascinating.
Interestingly, I quoted the section where he mentions that serial killers rarely cross racial lines to a friend, who proceeded to tell me I directly quoted Holden Ford in the new series of MINDHUNTER, the trailer of which I hadn’t watched it, which is just a fun little story that shows Keppel knew his stuff.
Most of the information in the book is common knowledge if you’ve done research on serial murders for any length of time, but the psychology that he delves into is truly fascinating.
Interestingly, I quoted the section where he mentions that serial killers rarely cross racial lines to a friend, who proceeded to tell me I directly quoted Holden Ford in the new series of MINDHUNTER, the trailer of which I hadn’t watched it, which is just a fun little story that shows Keppel knew his stuff.
August 6, 2021
This book has been written really well. It manages to get quite a bit of difficult material to understand across to you in an easy to digest form. In addition, the fact the book has quite a lot of sensitive subject matters, it could quite easily focus too much on the deviant and more explicit material and fail to get the core information across in a cognizant form. However, this book manages to be both interesting, almost thriller-like, but equally at the same time respectful. I thought it was an excellent read and I would certainly recommend it to anyone interested in this sort of subject matter. The content could be slightly explicit for some, however, I honestly don't think it's that bad.
August 18, 2017
Overall, this was an interesting read. As other reviewers have mentioned, it's heavy on the gory details, which is... fine. And while it's informative, it is not very well-written (or edited). It's tediously repetitive - I think it could be half as long without losing any details, analyses, or opinions. Additionally, I felt there was an alarming amount of victim-blaming, which is likely a product of its time, but rubbed me the wrong way nonetheless.
April 2, 2019
Sometimes I found it hard to read because at times it was too dense and had tons of information to process but still this book is fantastic. It is very informative so it is very useful to learn things about this monsters and pray that one day they will stop. The final chapter was really scary because it was just too close to life nowadays, we are behaving like them and we are not realizing that because we are normalizing everything that is outrageous and dangerous.
June 12, 2020
Good content overall, verry detailed (and gore) at some points. BUT: verry repetitive whitin chapters. It could surely fit in 200 pages instead of 300+.
At some points I was counting how many times the words "signature killer" were printed on the same page instead of focussing on the lecture itself and now I'm pretty sure you could fill 4-6 pages of the book by only fitting all the times "signature killer" was typed.
At some points I was counting how many times the words "signature killer" were printed on the same page instead of focussing on the lecture itself and now I'm pretty sure you could fill 4-6 pages of the book by only fitting all the times "signature killer" was typed.
April 3, 2024
A psychological look at some famous serial killers. A look at patterns, motivation and why they kept killing.
It's interesting but at times was quite heavy and full of detail that made it a slower read. Fans of psychology and serial crime should enjoy it.
It's interesting but at times was quite heavy and full of detail that made it a slower read. Fans of psychology and serial crime should enjoy it.
August 9, 2018
Heart-pounding, terrifying, intriguing, this book has it all. AND IT'S ALL REAL! Best crime novel I have ever read.
February 5, 2019
It was OK, but not as informative as books by the likes of John Douglas, Roy Hazelwood or Robert Ressler. Who all worked as profilers for the FBI. Ressler & Douglas invented profiling.
May 17, 2023
Definitely not for the faint of heart. Really detailed and technical, but structure could be better..
Read
November 12, 2023I got interested in Keppel by reading of him working with Bundy to catch Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer, but this book reads too much like a textbook.
July 1, 2025
it was alright for what it was intended to be right up until that last chapter lol
May 28, 2024
An in-depth look at how serial killers leave signatures behind even if they change the way they kill. If you know a lot about serial killers already, this takes a more academic and clinical look at their behaviors. Not a great choice for a casual reader. Keeps on the line of explaining the details of the murders without getting unnecessarily gruesome.
September 24, 2019
Enjoyed the first 3/4 and then he just goes on a rant about tv and society. Found some part very repetitive - literally- same points and words verbatim from a page or two before. Found this annoying. On the upside interesting read. But I found the author very boring and the book is probably somewhat dated. Loads of interesting and very graphic details included. Very graphic! You have been warned.
December 17, 2014
I found Dr. Keppel's work on the signatures of serial killers well done and informative. It is not for the faint of heart of course because of the sheer violence and hatred described within. But it is real and it happened and analysis of these crimes has helped law enforcement.
It is a good look at how crime scene and psychological analysis dissect the minds of serial murderers. There is one thing that did disturb me about the book. The crimes of Jeffrey Dahmer are actually glossed over. All the serial murders of women were described down to the last detail but this killing of gay men had almost no detail at all. I found that very curious and had to wonder why.
There is always that nugget of guilt reading these books, knowing that some modern day killers actually want this kind of book written about them. Personally, I'd be fine never knowing the killers name, give them some anonymous designation. But I am interested in the aberrant thought processes work and it does help in my writing.
It is a good look at how crime scene and psychological analysis dissect the minds of serial murderers. There is one thing that did disturb me about the book. The crimes of Jeffrey Dahmer are actually glossed over. All the serial murders of women were described down to the last detail but this killing of gay men had almost no detail at all. I found that very curious and had to wonder why.
There is always that nugget of guilt reading these books, knowing that some modern day killers actually want this kind of book written about them. Personally, I'd be fine never knowing the killers name, give them some anonymous designation. But I am interested in the aberrant thought processes work and it does help in my writing.
December 1, 2015
Robert Keppel's "Signature Killers" identifies this group as the largest subcategory of Serial Killers.
He shows that Signature Killers have their own subcategories. He gives many examples to illustrate his categories. In his summary of why they kill, he says that "it all begins with the seed of anger". He then fills this out with various examples.
The book, published in 1977, was written before the TV CSI (2000) and its spin-offs started. These kind of shows have presented a variety of murders and serial killers. Shows such as Criminal Minds have used the idea that serial killers usually leaves a "signature" or "Calling Card" (as R. Keppel calls it).
The examples he uses are all pre-1997. In 1997, the Pentium II had come out, Internet Explorer 4 was brand new, the demand for 3d graphics cards was starting, and it would be years (2004) before Facebook existed.
I gave 3 stars because this is dated material, but Keppel's concepts and examples remain good.
He shows that Signature Killers have their own subcategories. He gives many examples to illustrate his categories. In his summary of why they kill, he says that "it all begins with the seed of anger". He then fills this out with various examples.
The book, published in 1977, was written before the TV CSI (2000) and its spin-offs started. These kind of shows have presented a variety of murders and serial killers. Shows such as Criminal Minds have used the idea that serial killers usually leaves a "signature" or "Calling Card" (as R. Keppel calls it).
The examples he uses are all pre-1997. In 1997, the Pentium II had come out, Internet Explorer 4 was brand new, the demand for 3d graphics cards was starting, and it would be years (2004) before Facebook existed.
I gave 3 stars because this is dated material, but Keppel's concepts and examples remain good.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews